08 April 2014

Revived McCarthyism and Cohn's Hypocrisy

The head of Mozilla has been placed at center-stage in a growing controversy.

Increasingly public figures that have stood against the normalization of homosexuality are being denounced and forced out of their positions. This is happening in the media, academia and even the business world.

This is part of the massive backlash at work within the culture. Embittered by years of subjugation and being forced to dwell in the underground, the homosexual movement and its allies are in the process of changing the cultural narrative.

The battle was lost in the 1990's when it seemed like 'gays' were coming out of the woodwork. While officially most Americans claim to affiliate with some form of Christianity, it is essentially a Deistic faith and one not even remotely based on Scripture.

In surveys people say they believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God, but it's evident no one actually reads it and certainly very few believe in the God who reveals Himself in those pages.

As people began to see homosexuality normalized in popular culture, as more people they came into personal contact with homosexual people, as the youth culture (for many reasons) embraced it, and as science (or pseudo-science) seemed to back the idea that this is somehow a biological or evolutionary phenomenon, then people began to accept it.

We went from someone sitting on Donahue in the 1980's causing the audience to gasp by admitting in public that they were 'gay', to Ellen, to Britney Spears and Madonna kissing, to today's reality of Sodom and Gomorrah.

In the end, and this is pretty clear in the majority of Churches across our culture... people are not willing to make a stand and possibly ostracize people who refuse to repent of their behaviour. People are not willing to break with family and especially as the nature of parenting has changed...break with their kids.

We can argue about the why and how this has happened but it has.

As I watch these displays I keep thinking of Joseph McCarthy and his witch-hunts in the early 1950's.

If anyone during the depression had been involved with or consorted with people who had communistic or socialistic inclinations or affiliations they were subject to his condemnation.

McCarthyism represented the worst kind of bullying, oppressive thought-policing and was completely anti-democratic and frankly anti-constitutional.

There is no freedom without freedom of speech, the right of assembly, a free press, freedom of religion and the ability to do these things without being watched, monitored and recorded.

McCarthyism in a de facto sense was seeking the eradication of these basic civil rights. You only had them 'if' you agreed with the ruling regime.

It is shameful that many Christians in their fear of Communism (especially in the early days of the Cold War) backed McCarthy. And it is even more disgraceful and repugnant that there are still those who praise him and want a return of his project. The famous anti-ERA campaigner Phyllis Schlafly called for this as recent as 2013.

Unbelievable.

But what's even worse is the behaviour of those on the Left and especially within the homosexual community. The fact that they would collectively turn to this type of activity is nothing less than Reverse McCarthyism.

They are now in the process of witch-hunting anyone with any kind of public persona or responsibility who has (even the past) stood against them. Only the most contrite who publically repent will be tolerated.

For years Roy Cohn was probably more hated than even McCarthy himself. Why? His hypocrisy.

This was an era when you had homosexuals like Cohn and probably J Edgar Hoover going after homosexuals within the government. Their non-conformity and decadence were perceived as overlapping with Communism. It was wrong but seems especially sick when you look at people like Cohn and Hoover.

Cohn has been object of scorn, vilified in plays and movies, a tormented soul who desperately tried to hide the fact that he was dying of AIDS.

The Left has hated what he did and the fact that he did it hypocritically.

Today, the Left is engaging in McCarthyism and for them to do so is... well let's say it... supremely hypocritical.

It's a lesson in the corrupting nature of power. How many small oppressed nations and peoples, when the tables are turned and power is given to them are quick to turn from the oppressed into the oppressor?

I used to think that people could learn something from history if they bothered to study it. As the years go by, I've come to reject that notion. Most people don't learn anything from it and that's why it seems like it keeps repeating itself in different forms and contexts.

Maybe the Left doesn't see it. Some might get bogged down on McCarthy's anti-Communism, or his demagoguery, or the false accusations. That's to miss the forest through the trees.

In the end, it was a power-play, it was a faction within the US power structure that was trying to gain ascendancy by capitalizing on a public mood. Their tool... prosecuting thought-crime.

And that's what is happening right now.

 

 

6 comments:

  1. I agree that, depending on whose on the ascendant, the power play of McCarthyism will be utilized by whoever. Whether it's Petan and Vichy or DeGall and the Free-French, both sides committed atrocities. The brutalized Russians raped, butchered and slaughtered Germans. If history is anything, it's Lamech's triumphant dirge. Thankfully the Word of God is a thunderous "Nevertheless" in His reversal of the cross and resurrection.

    In regards to homosexuals, I think you're lacking something of Paul's pastoral touch. When confronted by the manifold wickedness in Corinth, Paul tells them they 'were' all those things, but no longer. They were washed in the blood of Christ and clean. But he said this on account of their continued actions, not only the memory. It's a difficult journey, with real individuals with complicated pasts and personalities, to correct others on the way.

    Cal

    ReplyDelete
  2. Whenever I mention homosexuality it seems to bother you. I've deliberately tried to steer a path that avoids the politicized semi-violence of the Christian Right and total capitulation.

    I've said that on a civil level we should be tolerant and yet at the same time we can't back down from calling sin what it is.

    I guess I'm just baffled as to what you think Paul's pastoral touch was. Of course there were ex-homosexuals in Corinth. And such were some of you.....

    But no longer right?

    I don't think Romans 1 is particularly pastoral.

    I recall you kind of splitting hairs (at least to my mind) over the different types of homosexual behaviour... sex v. I don't know a kind effeminate gayness or something.

    I guess I just can't grasp where you're coming from on this. Are you saying there are 'gay' Christians?

    You mention the no longer, but then it seems like you're suggesting they still somehow have that identity or something. While we can certainly be sympathetic to people who are still struggling... I'm not sure how my comments regarding Cohn would have any application here. The mainstream homosexual movement isn't repentant, they are defiant.

    I still don't understand your point of view on this or what it is that I'm saying that seems to always offend you.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I should have left a little more of a comment than what I did, as it was. I'm not offended, just an issue I've considered.

    My comments keep getting eaten, but suffice to say, Romans 1 does list homosexual sex acts as sinful. Yet on the list, I think churches are more likely to be swamped with unrepentant gossippers, liars, back-biters, and maliciousness than homosexuals or gays.

    For the distinction, and where I'm coming from, check this article: http://archive.catholic.com/thisrock/1994/9407fea1.asp

    I think it helps frame the conversation better.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'll take a look at the link.

    What do you mean your comments keep getting eaten? I don't understand.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I tried posting and it just disappeared

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ah, all the blog comment sections do that from time to time. I don't know why.

    I always either do a quick Right-click (select all) and copy before I try and post the comment or...

    most of the time I type my comments on a Word document then copy-paste.

    Sorry about that. I used to have no restrictions at all but I was getting major spam comments, so I added the security feature.

    But I don't restrict any comments. You can cuss me out if you like. (smile)

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.